The Daily Newsstand · Free, Always
Thursday, October 1, 2026

Sandiganbayan affirms denying Jojo Ang bid to consolidate 14 graft cases

Translate
Sandigan’s 5th Division affirms move denying consolidation bid of Jojo Ang’s graft cases
Uswag Ilonggo party-list Rep. Jojo Ang appears before the Sandiganbayan Second Division on Aug. 3, 2026, for his cases involving alleged violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

MANILA, Philippines — The Sandiganbayan Fifth Division on Thursday affirmed its resolution denying the attempt of Uswag Ilonggo Rep. Jojo Ang to consolidate all of his 14 graft cases.

Ang was charged for having an alleged stake in a construction firm that won ₱214 million in Public Works contracts while being a sitting party-list representative, according to prosecutors.

READ: Sandiganbayan issues arrest warrant vs Rep. Jojo Ang, ex-Rep. Arnulfo Go

Article continues after this advertisement

In a resolution dated Oct. 1, the court said it affirms its Sept. 9 resolution denying Ang’s motion.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“In the assailed Resolution, this court held that although all fourteen criminal charges stem from a single Ombudsman Resolution, each involve a distinct public infrastructure project with its own unique contract, procurement process, and financial records, requiring the court to evaluate liability on a per-project basis rather than collectively,” the court said.

In its latest resolution, the court reiterates that “although the cases appear similar in nature, it is proper to try them separately and deny consolidation to give each case the attention it requires and prevent delay.”

Furthermore, the court said Ang committed “a fatal procedural misstep” by not filing its motion for consolidation to the Second Division, which handles the lowest docket number of all his 14 cases.

The 2018 Revised Internal Rules of the Sandiganbayan states that a case would be consolidated under the division handling the case with the lowest docket number.

Article continues after this advertisement

This time, Ang argues that there is similarity of allegations and evidence, which only differed in contract descriptions and dates.

“After a careful review of Ang’s arguments, the court finds no compelling reason to depart from its ruling,” the ruling said. 

Article continues after this advertisement

However, the court said “the consolidation of cases is addressed to the sound discretion of judges.”

So far, four of 14 cases of Ang have been consolidated in the Second Division. /das

View the original on Inquirer →

KioskNews shows a cleaned-up reading view extracted from the publisher’s page — the original always lives on their site, not ours.